1/21/2016

Bob Dole, renowned for being a loser in a presidential race, had this to say yesterday:

Bob Dole, the former Kansas senator and 1996 Republican presidential nominee, has never been fond of Senator Ted Cruz of Texas. But in an interview Wednesday, Mr. Dole said that the party would suffer “cataclysmic” and “wholesale losses” if Mr. Cruz was the nominee, and that Donald J. Trump would fare better.

“I question his allegiance to the party,” Mr. Dole said of Mr. Cruz. “I don’t know how often you’ve heard him say the word ‘Republican’ — not very often.” Instead, Mr. Cruz uses the word “conservative,” Mr. Dole said, before offering up a different word for Mr. Cruz: “extremist.”

Meanwhile, let’s talk about the fraud that is Sarah Palin. She’s the woman who was catapulted to fame by being chosen for a potential VP slot by John McCain, a former POW. Trump is the guy who once mocked McCain by saying: “I like people who weren’t captured.” So the fraud Palin yesterday described Trump as someone who would be a “commander in chief who will respect them and honor them.”

You might have noticed (or maybe you didn’t) that I didn’t blog about Donald Trump in December 2015 — or indeed so far in January 2016. My reasoning was that Donald Trump is dangerous to the Republican Party, to conservatism, and to this country — and yet he keeps gaining media attention. I thought that, in my own small way, I would register a protest, by not blogging about him at all.

But with the clown show that was the Palin speech, followed by Dole’s and Trent Lott’s boobery, I think it’s high time I made a stand here. Just in case, somehow, I haven’t been clear in my numerous previous tweets and posts denouncing this horrible, awful man.

Now, I don’t want to get off on a rant here . . .

. . . .but people who actually support Donald Trump are Exhibit A in why democracy is a terrible way to run things.

I no longer really think I can change any minds with this blog. This is not about persuading Trump supporters. They are impervious to reason and not persuadable. Of anything.

No, this is all about saying “I told you so.” And here’s what I told you — not just last year, constantly, which I did, and you can check the record — but right here, right now, on January 21, 2016. I could write a book about what a narcissistic, nasty, self-absorbed, vapid, shallow, statist, Constitution-stomping prick Donald Trump is. But let’s just consider two issues — just two! — that should be near and dear to the hearts of anyone who cares about liberty: his love of dictators and hatred of free speech.

TRUMP LOVES DICTATORS

First, Donald Trump loves him some dictators.

I know this is old news, but I think Trump’s view on various strongmen around the world is . . . instructive.

I was very unimpressed. Their system is a disaster. What you will see there soon is a revolution; the signs are all there with the demonstrations and picketing. Russia is out of control and the leadership knows it. That’s my problem with Gorbachev. Not a firm enough hand.

You mean firm hand as in China?

When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak … as being spit on by the rest of the world–

How many young guys — he was like 26 or 25 when his father died — take over these tough generals, and all of a sudden … he goes in, he takes over, and he’s the boss . . . It’s incredible. He wiped out the uncle, he wiped out this one, that one. I mean this guy doesn’t play games.

To be fair, Trump did call Kim Jong-Un a “maniac.” But he has also called Ted Cruz a “maniac.”

“Well, I think our country does plenty of killing also, Joe,” Trump said. “You know, there’s a lot of stuff going on in the world right now, Joe. A lot of killing going on and a lot of stupidity.”

Donald Trump has told us what kind of leader he admires, and it’s strongmen. Donald Trump is not concerned about these leaders’ atrocities. If you ask him enough times, you can get him to give lip service to the idea that their atrocities should be condemned — if you can get him to acknowledge the atrocities in the first place. If they stroke his massive ego, he’ll question whether they actually occurred to begin with, just as one of their active supporters would.

I’m not saying that Donald Trump is Putin, or Stalin, or Hitler. But the same ugly emotions that caused the rise of such people are part of human nature, and part of Trump’s success. The people of the Soviet Union supported Stalin. The people of Italy supported Mussolini. And the people of Germany supported Hitler. And people are the same everywhere.

Again, none of this is news. It’s just enough to make you want to grab Trump supporters by the lapels and scream: WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU THINKING?

TRUMP LOVES THREATENING TRUTHFUL SPEECH WITH LAWSUITS

The Washington Post just ran a story about how Trump is a crap businessman. Which he was. Four bankruptcies. How did the Donald reply when the Post asked him for comment?

Trump vehemently denied that the deal represented a personal failing or affected his personal wealth.

“This was not personal. This was a corporate deal,” he said. “If you write this one, I’m suing you.”

In addition, although RTR has no plans to produce any advertisements against your client, we are intrigued (but not surprised) by your continued efforts to silence critics of your client’s campaign by employing litigious threats and bullying. Should your client actually be elected Commander-in-Chief, will you be the one writing the cease and desist letters to Vladimir Putin, or will that be handled by outside counsel? As a candidate for President, your client is a public figure and his campaign should, and will, be fact-checked. The ability to criticize a candidate’s record, policies and matters of public importance lies at the heart of the First Amendment, as courts have repeatedly recognized. If you have the time between bankruptcy filings and editing reality show contracts, we urge you to flip through the Supreme Court’s decision in New York Times v. Sullivan. If your client is so thin-skinned that he cannot handle his critics’ presentation of his own public statements, policies and record to the voting public, and if such communications hurts his feelings, he is welcome to purchase airtime to defend his record. After all, a wall can be built around many things, but not around the First Amendment.

As the target of several frivolous lawsuits, I can tell you that I have nothing but contempt for people who bring them or even threaten them.

BUT HE WOULD BE GREAT ON IMMIGRATION!

Well . . .

We all know that Trump criticized Romney for being too mean to illegals. He called Romney’s plan of self-deportation “maniacal.” Like Cruz the maniac, or Kim Jong-Un, the wacky and incredible maniac to whom “you gotta give credit.”

Meanwhile, a 2013 tweet emerged today that showed Trump was recently willing to support amnesty:

Congress must protect our borders first. Amnesty should be done only if the border is secure and illegal immigration has stopped.

387 Responses to “I Will Never, Ever Vote for Donald Trump: A Rant”

Two terms of obama should be exhibit A on why a democracy is a bad way to run things. But, not voting for Trump could be the same as a vote for hillary, bernie or biden. Look what happened to mitt when conservatives stayed home. He definitely would have been better than obama.

I said this before, but the only possible reason I would vote for old whazzizname over Hillary! is that we could probably rid ourselves of the guy in 2020, but Her Royal Majesty would be the odds-on favorite to last until 2024. But as a Californian I can just happily cast my vote for the American Independent Party or the Libertarian or someone else.

If Donald Trump said that he would ban football, many of his supporters would decide they never really liked football anyway. It’s really that crazy. Trump Derangement Syndrome mainly affects his supporters. It would be funny if it wasn’t so terrible.

And near as I can tell, it’s about wanting fewer brown people. I really want to NOT believe that, but it’s the only answer that fits the facts. Opposing Trump does not mean that one wants amnesty — I think our host’s position on that is pretty clear — it means that one opposes Emperor Trump and his brownshirt tactics.

If you thought that Obama’s disdain for democratic norms was a problem, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

If Donald Trump said that he would ban football, many of his supporters would decide they never really liked football anyway. It’s really that crazy. Trump Derangement Syndrome mainly affects his supporters. It would be funny if it wasn’t so terrible.

Hell, if he said the Constitution was a tool of The Establishment that was keeping us weak, I’ll bet a large swath (no, not all) of his voters would clamor to get rid of it immediately.

Trump is constantly quoting polls, which may explain why other candidates are not doing so. If this is reverse-psychology on Trump’s part then he is very clever. The other candidates ought to quote polls too, because Trump is almost definitely a loser. Here are some nationwide poll results from January 17:

As one who is unenrolled I care very little about your peoples parties. You all deserve each other. Cruz is the only hope to bring us back to some sort of normalcy. Keep beating each other up. I have plenty of pop corn to get me through this laughable disaster.

The guy writing a 17-part series on Austrian economics supports a candidate who wants to double legal immigration. You have no hope of persuading fellow Mexifornians to adopt your views, but you want to inflict your state’s failed experiment on the rest of the country. You’re the buffoon in this picture. Mises or Mestizos: pick one.

Meanwhile, a 2013 tweet emerged today that showed Trump was recently willing to support amnesty: “Congress must protect our borders first. Amnesty should be done only if the border is secure and illegal immigration has stopped.”

That’s roughly where I was, too, a few years ago: against amnesty, but open to the idea in exchange for genuine border and immigration control that precedes legalization. Why should that scandalize me?

I BEGGED 3 GOP candidates to take up immigration. I didn’t even ask Trump– he asked for an advance copy of my book.
– Ann Coulter

Trump made this the focus of his campaign. He is at least pretending to listen to Jeff Sessions about this stuff. He may be full of s***, but he’s the only candidate who even potentially will revise immigration policy to align with the interests of actual, existing Americans. The rest of the field just wants to provide cheap labor to the donor class.

Went to a local planning commission meeting recently. My objections to a particular plan were met with the observations that it fit the master plan and subsequent amendments.
Thing is, being reactive is for chumps. You go to a meeting and they tell you, too late buddy.
The timing may look suspicious, but,really,we were going to get around to this eventually.
Citizens have to get in front of issues so they can say to the pols, too late. You can’t do that.
IOW, you have to be watching all the time and get involved in the down and dirty.
Hardly anybody wants to do that.
The result is…Trump.
It’s been said over and over that if the establishment does not deal with citizens’ concerns,
somebody who will shows up and you might not like him.
But the citizens did not do what was necessary to get the government to take their concerns seriously.
As, I believe, Insty has said, it’s a loser’s game to expect good people to go into government to do the right thing. Government has to be set up so as to incentivize bad people to do the right thing.
Instead, we incentivize the corrupt to be corrupt and we pay them to not pay attention to us.
So what do you expect?
Local organizations which can primary out a candidate pretty consistently belong to the left. Not to centrist or conservatives.
As Ron Radosh, ex commie, said, they took over campus organizations by showing up early, staying late and doing the scut work.

Hmmm,
P, you just said in a previous thread that everyone needed to stop the personal attacks,
And now you call Trump supporters buffoons.

Sometimes, maybe often, we end up repeating ourselves,
Which I will now do.

The basis for being a Trump supporter,
As I see it,
Is that one has had enough of the broken promises of both parties,
And maybe he’ll do something about at least one obvious problem
Close the frickn doors to the country and make people at least ring the door bell.

Trump is not the bulk of the problem,
Just the tip
The betrayal of the voters by the political class is the problem

If anything, now is the time not to insult Trump voters,
But to point out that the eRepubs would rather have Trump than Cruz
Showing who should get the protest vote.

I saw one break down of data that revealed that the only group that had support more than 50% for Trump were independents, not conservatives.
If the eRepubs quit backing Rubio, Bush, etc and leave it Trump -Cruz,
Cruz wins.

Anyone paying attention knows that Europe is in big trouble because of mass, uncontrolled immigration if nothing else,
And it is reasonable to think that if the government won’t do anything else,
If they would at least do that,
Maybe we would have a chance.

And since neither Dems nor Repubs will do squat,
Find someone who will.

IMO logical,
But only on the surface,
Like Obama and only listening to what he said in public on the campaign trail.

The hard cores will not change,
Appeal to those who might,
Is my opinion.

One of the original Sierra Club founders (Pat Moore?) changed to support nuclear energy. One bit that reportedly decided him was that more electric power was going to be generated by SOMEthing, and it would be either nuclear or coal. Trump or Clinton?

The basis for being a Trump supporter,
As I see it,
Is that one has had enough of the broken promises of both parties,
And maybe he’ll do something about at least one obvious problem
Close the frickn doors to the country and make people at least ring the door bell.

Yes that’s pretty much it. But I’m far from confident that he would do anything much different there. The fact that he hangs out so much with the GOPe types and is seemingly accusing Cruz of not being a “go along get along” type is a HUGE red flag. I guess he would have to do something but it probably wouldn’t be the dramatic change on illegals people are expecting, like mass deportations. In fact if he’s the nominee I expect he’ll drop any mention of deportations like a hot potato.

We also frequently hear from his supporters how he’s the one who is most likely to beat Hillary but as mentioned in #7, currently the polls indicate he’s the LEAST likely to beat Hillary.

If you like the way things are going vote for an insider. If you’re looking for a new broom to sweep clean vote for an outsider. If you can’t make up your mind vote for someone who has a foot inside the government but who acts like he’s outside the fold.

The same gullibility that motivated Obama voters is identical to what drives Trump voters; instead of looking at his record and actions, they believed anything they were told.

Trump played a valuable role, like a tree trunk you cut down to make into a battering ram to knock down the castle walls, immediately followed up by storming in and throwing the tyrants out the windows. However, rational people do not then set up the tree trunk as an idol and seriously look for guidance from it.

“Cruz will set a new tone in DC. Less regulation, smaller government and adherence to the Constitution of the United States of America. The end of ‘go along to get along’. It will be an unmitigated disaster. Bob Dole knows it. You know it. And the American people know it.”

“When I told Libby I was planning to retire soon, she told Bob Dole, ‘I married Bob Dole for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, but I did not marry Bob Dole for lunch.’ Bob Dole appreciated that because Bob Dole knows he has a tendency to grate on people at times.”

I’m embarrassed to say that a lot of this post’s details are news to me. I knew Trump was a blowhard and has flip flopped around and was thin skinned, but I had forgotten about his comment about captured US POWs and never heard his praise of ruthless dictators crushing dissent.

I guarantee the media has quite a list of things to share with America about Trump once he’s nominated. This ‘gloves come off’ bit when it’s too late for the GOP is a cliche now.

Trent Lott and Bob Dole let this country down repeatedly when we needed to bring the budget back to reality. Their viciousness towards Cruz proves a lot about them, and a lot about Cruz. Again the folks who want a bloated and corrupt government are scared of what Cruz can do.

If you like the way things are going vote for an insider. If you’re looking for a new broom to sweep clean vote for an outsider

Ropelight, I think it’s great that you’re presenting the Trump supporter POV here despite all the flack you have to take. You’ve been a reasonable commenter here for a long time, and I think it’s foolish to bash you for making sure the blog isn’t an echo chamber.

However, I think the insiders and establishment are clearly lining up with Trump and afraid of the ‘disaster’ of a conservative like Cruz winning, even though Cruz is a mild mannered and intelligent guy. I think even though Cruz has been in DC for a little while he’s the real outsider, and Trump is quite the connected insider, given his decades of connections to congressmen and presidents on both sides of the aisle (including helping many politicians that you obviously oppose).

Now that we know Trump is open to Amnesty too, there’s got to be some doubt in your mind as to whether Trump will accomplish a single thing you want, and plenty of concern that he could do many things you do not want. I know from experience how bitter arguments about politics can make us hostile to jumping ship, but think about it. Our great leaders, Reagan for example, thought communist massacres were evil and never crushed dissenting opinions in court.

The real irony here is that the rise of Trump the deal-maker is due to largely republican voter disgust with the political-corporate deal-making inside the beltway. When did Trump ever make a deal that was good for the little guy?

You do have to hand it to him for being shrewd enough to run a celebrity-style twitter campaign that is disruptive enough to prevent any serious examination of his capabilities or intentions. Cruz may be the last real hope of stopping him but engaging him in the finger-pointing name-calling space is not the way to do it.

The Trumpsters are blinded by love. Until they recognize the deal he’s offering is for his benefit not theirs we’ll be stuck with him ruling over US much like Obama has. What matters is the people, communities, businesses and investors he’s trampled on his way to the top of Trump Tower.

What I’m hearing here is that Trump is a very bad man and anyone who supports him, even on this blog, is some kind of dope. I’m hearing that some of you including Patterico like Obama more than Trump. I say that because Hillary! stated she is running on Obamas policies therefore, if Trump becomes the Republican candidate and you don’t vote for Trump you are voting for Obamas policies or at least not voting against them and you are voting against Republicans since he would represent the party.

The Republican Party is going down the crapper and taking America with it. That’s because if a candidate doesn’t meet the unrealistically high standard of being “perfect” the ideologue Republicans fall away and don’t vote. Like what they did to Romney last time. What they did was drop Obama on us. Thanks. This doesn’t happen with democrats. They’d vote for Mao if it means they win. The problem then becomes who is going to turn out to support their party more, disaffected democrats or disaffected Republicans? Because the democrats don’t care what happens to America, they aren’t patriotic. But if we are the real Patriots and we care about America we have a duty to make sure Hillary! loses.

If she wins she will bring in Congresscritters on her coattails. Also state governors and congresses And appoint at least two probably three Supreme Court justices. Do you want America run by seven leftist justices in black robes for the next fifteen years?

Everything we are against Hillary! is for and even though Trump is not for 100% of what we’re for his score unlike Hillary’s isn’t zero.

We don’t need dynasties in America so the very name Clinton should demand pause. But the very idea that a committed Conservative Republican would refuse to vote for the Party’s Candidate makes my skin crawl. Especially knowing the democrats are about to campaign by saying, showing and doing anything to get their sick, demented commie/grifter or old hippy commie elected.

We need to be at least that committed to save this Republic or we don’t deserve to keep it.

Those of us who live in the People’s Republic of California know that this state will give its
electoral votes to whomever the Demorats nominate. Since Hillary will be indicted as planned, the nominee will be whichever candidate Obama selects. Bernie, Slow Joe, or—

I’m hearing that some of you including Patterico like Obama more than Trump. I say that because Hillary! stated she is running on Obamas policies therefore, if Trump becomes the Republican candidate and you don’t vote for Trump you are voting for Obamas policies or at least not voting against them and you are voting against Republicans since he would represent the party.

Relax. First of all, my vote doesn’t matter because I live in California. Second of all, my vote would not matter no matter where I lived. It’s one vote. If the election is close enough that my vote breaks the tie, which will never ever ever ever ever ever happen, then there would be endless recounts anyway, and all the vote totals would change anyway. So my vote is totally meaningless, and would be in any state.

if Trump becomes the Republican candidate and you don’t vote for Trump you are voting for Obamas policies or at least not voting against them and you are voting against Republicans since he would represent the party.

Why is Trump given a pass on this party loyalty thing? He donated to Gore as Gore was having overseas military ballots thrown out.

At some point party loyalty has a limit. I think when we’re talking about a guy who praises the Tienanmen Square Massacre you really shouldn’t be cool with him because of party loyalty.

BTW, Trump is not running against Hillary. Trump is running against conservatism, with the GOP establishment at his side. Arguing about Clinton’s name has no bearing on whether I support Cruz or Trump.

If she wins she will bring in Congresscritters on her coattails. Also state governors and congresses And appoint at least two probably three Supreme Court justices. Do you want America run by seven leftist justices in black robes for the next fifteen years?
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 1/21/2016 @ 7:20 am

That is a good argument for voting for Trump, if we knew he’d appoint conservative judges. It’s unclear to me what kind of SCOTUS justices Trump would appoint. He’s said his sister would make a fine SCOTUS justice, which is not a good sign. Trump has no track record of talking about constitutional issues that I know of, therefore I don’t know how we could be confident he’d appoint conservatives. I have a feeling he’d appoint Kennedy types, which is still better than what Hillary would appoint.

I think when people realize that Trump is willing to work with anyone for any reason, as his career shows, they may reconsider their support. I understand liking his blunt, strong message but he is most proud of his deal-making and being a compromiser, evendors if ut results in bankruptcy for his companies. I don’t think we want any more compromising. That’s what gave us multi-trillion dollar deficits and out-of-control imigration policies.

My last line in #47 said “committed”, I mean Diabolical, committed isn’t strong enough.

It was worth fighting for in 1776 and the Country born from that was NOT perfect: slavery for one thing. But they didn’t “refuse” to vote for Independence because the Declaration allowed for slavery. America, like all nations, was not born nor will it ever be perfect. However, it is the best Idea for Freedom and Prosperity for the common man ever dreamed up in the history of Nations. “Refusing” to vote for America because it wasn’t perfect would have let England win. Franklin knew that, Jefferson knew it and all the Signers knew it too. But they were willing to make the compromises they had to make in order to birth This Nation. Are we willing to make the compromises we need to make in order to keep it? Trump is a compromise that may never come but Hillary! is a commie tyrant that must be stopped.

I was for Walker, then Fiorina and now Cruz. But baby, I’ll vote for Trump if he’s our candidate just as sure as I voted for any other Republican. Especially, now, especially today, especially against those two commies.

rand Paul loves them a little, but Donald Trump loves them a lot. With a few exceptions, like the one in Raqqa, but probably not because he’s a dictator. And his only problem with China is their trade and their monetary policy.

If Baghdadi would change his attitude toward the United States, and maybe its allies. Donald Trump maybe might change his attitude toward ISIS. You might even get Donald Trump to say that. That would be the deal of the century.

“I question his allegiance to the party,” Mr. Dole said of Mr. Cruz. “I don’t know how often you’ve heard him say the word ‘Republican’ — not very often.” Instead, Mr. Cruz uses the word “conservative,”

In turn, Trump rarely, if ever, uses the word “conservative” and instead often says “Republican” (if even that), and has a well-known history of being as squishy as quicksand. IOW, Dole apparently has a poor grasp of how to assess or judge people correctly. I never assumed he would be that weak, but the ethos of “shhh, please don’t talk about religion or politics—you’ll make people around you nervous or hostile!!” allows many of us to wear sort of a veil of privacy (or subterfuge).

Whether a person is of the left or right, or in-between (whatever that means in increasingly left-leaning 21st-century America), I always become very wary if he or she isn’t reliable or accurate in at least the basic characterization of people and situations.

Trump is promoting general indifference to other human beings’s suffering, and his immmigration policy is an inextricable part of it. Opposing amnesty goes with supporting dictators. gthey are complementary policies.

Really, he has to love dictators. If you’re not for allowing refugees to immigrate, and you also don’t want to get rid of a dictator, then you have to be perfectly satisfied with people suffering under a dictator. How else can you do nothing?

Aphrael, I don’t agree with your points in #52 but that’s not my point. I want Cruz and I will vote for Cruz in the primary whether my vote counts or not but, if Trump wins he becomes my candidate and I will vote for him in the general.

Dustin, I realize Trump is not now running against Hillary!. I was “supposing” he won our nomination. I’m just saying in the primaries it’s easy to say you won’t vote for Trump. We have any selections. I’m voting for Cruz. But in the General election if Trump’s the Republican, then what? Just give u and hand it to the commies?

Why do I get the feeling that if Trump is elected to be POTUS, we may be getting a “Obama lite” leader??? Also, could the press be manipulating the polls just enough to make it seem that Trump is “the people’s choice”?

People want to make pragmatic arguments for voting for Trump – before a single caucus or primary has been held.

How bout this: if Trump actually wins the nomination, after all of you “pragmatists” (who Really Like Cruz! but are just so pragmatic that you would pragmatically vote for Trump if you had to Beat Hillary!) have already cast primary votes for someone besides Trump, THEN you can start making your pragmatic arguments for voting for Trump. In the meantime, stop talking about Trump. Make him irrelevant. Support one of the other candidates that you claim to like, the support of whom you can justify on grounds beyond a manufactured and disingenuous “pragmatism.”

Of course, the truth of the matter is that a lot of people just secretly like Trump and are throwing up a smokescreen because they know (deep down) that liking Trump is a shameful, shameful thing.

I just remember how many conservatives decided the Republican candidate who had a good chance to defeat Harry Reid declared that s/he was not pure enough, insisted on a purer candidate who had no chance, and we got Harry Reid for another term. Among the many consequences was an anti-nuke Chairman of the USNRC and the end of Yucca Mountain.

Hey y’all, PSA: this is a long comment from Dustin, so scroll past if you don’t want to read a Finkleman length essay. 😉

But in the General election if Trump’s the Republican, then what? Just give u and hand it to the commies?

Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

First, my mistake representing you as a Trump supporter in the primary. I haven’t been following things and was just interpreting that one comment. I see now you’re just what-if-ing the likely nominee being the nominee.

I worked for Mccain’s campaign and many of us didn’t really believe in the guy either, but were thinking of Wright and Alinksi and lesser of two evils. I’ll never forget working the phones for early county results in Florida (I was in Missouri) and some big-wig realized there was no chance, announcing ‘the bad news is that Obama won, the good news is Mccain lost.’ A little dry humor to go with the beers that were passed out. Back then I was thinking as you do here, that we have to be prepared to make even a major compromise for the GOP. An opponent like Bernie is actually a commie, just as you say.

But then Romney was even tougher for me, and I had begun to think that nominating a moderate was actually a big reason we were going to lose. I still voted for him, and we still lost, and I reflected on how bitter that primary had been.

This round is such a circus I barely even bother keeping up with it. I don’t think anyone is really listening to eachother. And the establishment is so cynical as to line up with Trump just to prevent Cruz from reforming things. Ten years ago that would have shocked me, but it’s expected. It’s really apparent at this moment how serious the GOP is about preventing reform. They aren’t the party that opposes the ‘commies’ as you say. They are the stalking horse for progressive policies, expecting to remain in the minority but staying at the table of power. Not the power to change things, but the power to be important and bribed.

Why not compromise with Cruz, who has been a serious and thoughtful Republican for a long time, promising many of the ideals Reagan espoused? We all know our budget process and administrative bloat require painful and serious change, and here’s the smart guy who promises to do it. Why doesn’t the establishment look at Trump and unite behind the conservative who can win? Because Mitch McConnell and friends accept what is happening to this country. They are part of it.

So back to your question, should conservatives stand with the GOP in the general election? Vote for even Trump if he has that (R) by his name, out of simple opposition to the (D) candidate?

No. We should realize the GOP is desperately holding the position that a reform effort needs to take. The GOP was never conceived as a conservative party and rarely has been one.

So on the ballot, I will not see the (R). I will act as though both candidates are democrats, even on downticket elections, unless I know for sure otherwise. As Aphrael says this could be a terrible election for the GOP. That means more disaster around the globe, more corruption from agencies like BATF and IRS, more graft for the really bad guys, more debt for the next generation. That’s a hell of a cost just for my ideological standards. I honestly can’t say how I’ll vote, then, but I see benefits to the GOP being crushed.

I agree with Leviticus that we haven’t had one vote yet so it’s way too soon to be throwing in the towel. But I also agree with Dustin that if Trump is the nominee, I’m out — but not because I like or dislike Trump. I’m out because I’m convinced the GOP can co-opt him. He’s perfectly willing to do business with the establishment and even brags they are already contacting and befriending him. He will be on their team, not ours.

“Crushing the GOP” may sound enticing – and emotionally satisfying, as well – but when I look back over these past 7 years and know how different things could’ve been if the country had elected McCain-Palin or Romney-Ryan, however flawed they were, I look back in anger. What America has on its hands today is an unmitigated disaster, on several fronts. Be careful what you ask for, you may just get it.

Patterico said: The Washington Post just ran a story about how Trump is a crap businessman. Which he was. Four bankruptcies.

I have seen plenty of “Conservative” bloggers attack Trump, sometimes with what I hoped was misguided anger, but too often delving into prideful and even malicious slander.

Nobody has the time or the patience to convince someone who doesn’t want to be convinced but:

Trump is not a “crap businessman”.

When I invest in a commodity, a contract, a company, you do not lose more than the money you invested (putting aside recklessness with margin and leverage). This principle is called “Limited Liability”. The companies I invest in can, and sometimes do, go bankrupt.

It happens. It’s a part of doing business.

However, I personally do not go bankrupt.

Why?

Because I invested only a part of my fortune into the venture, rather than putting all my eggs in one basket. When the company goes bankrupt, I lose that investment, but no more. The creditors and bondholders of the bankrupt company cannot come after my personal assets and money which I never invested.

The idea behind investment and wealth protection is to win more than you lose. Various investments or business propositions different risk-reward ratios, from opening a lemonade stand down the street, to private equity funds in Southeast Asia – and often require principled “hedges” whether ordering stops and limits on your trades, or using other counter-investments in areas where money would flow if your primary investments don’t pan out.

Built in “Limited liability” is one way the financial system “hedges” its bets. And because we understand “risk management”, Trump and his Trump Organization LLC (Limited Liability Conglomerate) has never been bankrupt any more than I have.

From Henry Ford to Bill Gates, every businessman has failed at some stage; every businessman of note has been a party to bankruptcy. Only egomaniacs, convinced of their own perfection, would think otherwise.

“Never do business with a man who knows no failure.”

Like me, Trump has won some, and lost some.

Unlike me, he started with a higher market capitalization (yeah, I know nobody uses this to evaluate cap anymore) and has succeeded far more at the risk-reward ROIs and frequency-turnover than I ever have. He has used unsavory means to manage and offset risk as well; from paying protection money to politicians who would otherwise ruin him, to providing loans and payoffs to neutralize the Sharptons of the world to protect his employees, his family, and his businesses.

If you begrudge him that, then I will say this: You have no idea how far America’s business culture has fallen in these past 30 years.

Trump is a Saint compared to the Buffets, Warrens, and Jobs of the world (and richer than him, because of it). It’s stunning that he’s held out as long, and as openly, as he has.

He has only been a party to a handful of bankrupt companies after building, owning, managing hundreds of them. That’s an extraordinary record, btw, considering his personality and the environment he’s in. Yes, he’s not a minor investor like me, but his enemies list runs like a who’s who of the world’s Fortune 500. Today, his company is large enough that its dollar-value is less important than its structural position within the economy. As people in business like to say:

“The Rich have money, but the Wealthy have assets.”

Put another way: Trump is harder to attack financially without partially attacking the financial structure and a million other interests as collateral damage.

It’s the financial equivalent of mutually-assured destruction.

Cut-throat doesn’t begin to describe this playing field, which is why lesser men have no chance even if elected to the Presidency.

And yet, for so many reasons, I can tell you the business world from their board rooms to their gofers are terrified of what Trump is capable of. They’re certainly not afraid of anyone else, including Cruz who many in the business world have long knows is already bought and paid for.

You think Sarah Palin – of all people – doesn’t know Cruz and Rubio have sold out her cause?

Part of the reason there are and will be “corrections” in world markets reflects the uncertainty of future American monetary and fiscal policy, trade policy, regulation, immigration, etc. Much of that “uncertainty” is, of course, based on the political dynamic that Trump represents. Foreign countries, multinational companies, hedge fund managers, etc, have to make estimates, formulate strategies, and reconsider their positions, hedging based on that uncertainty.

Trump is not a “crap businessman” or “clownish” or “hirnverbrannt” or “biscornu”, or any number of insults in a dozen other languages his small-minded and cowardly internationalist “betters” have flung at him.

He is, in fact, a great businessman, especially considering he is largely alone among his elite peers, when even his children have been known to shy away from him, given his well-known (and much reviled) “jingoistic” tendencies among the international business elite. And yet, he has never lost that instinct to speak off-the-cuff in defense of his homeland which made him a pariah among business leaders even in his own country.

And what has long been famously sneered at in the upper echelons as a weakness, from a bygone era, that colored his managerial judgment…

…is again on display in what may be the Don’s last outburst of “jingoism”.

And one day, if there is any decency among so-called “Conservatives”, they’ll at least acknowledge it by its proper name: Patriotism.

We can’t forget, well I can’t that McCain three that race, re the hones memo, and I can’t confirm but Romney certainly slowed to third gear at the end.so how willing is the establishment to enable the dems.

The fact that the GOPe SOBs are now running around talking about Trump being better than Cruz “because Cruz is too principled” makes me sick. They tried and failed to foist Jeb on us, and tens of millions of dollars later have single digit poll numbers for their efforts. Then they tried their shift to Rubio, which has not been particularly successful. As it becomes apparent that Cruz is rising, the previous antipathy towards Trump from the GOPe has pivoted to panic that a principled conservative like Cruz is threatening the gravy train for despicable lying bastards like McConnell, Boehner and Ryan.

Tea party conservatives should be looking into what Cruz has said and DONE to determine for themselves whether or not he is principled. They should do the same for Trump, and post haste. Whether Hillary survives the ongoing investigation without being indicted, it does not seem possible that whichever candidate wins the GOP nomination that the attack ads won’t be slamming Clinton for lying and incompetency…unless the GOP candidate purposefully throws the election.

$19 trillion in debt. Muslim terrorism on the rise. Iranian scum with nuclear tipped ICBMs. Worldwide economic recession coming that will make 2007/2008 look like a wet firecracker. The bread-and-circuses modus operandi of the DC political class has demonstrated they cannot – or will not – take responsible action to actually fix problems that have been festering and multiplying for the last 50-80 years. Kicking the can down the road isn’t possible when there is no more road, and the mobocracy will turn rather nasty when the government crack handouts stop.

Wish I could remember where I saw this quote, but it is the most concise and relevant description of the slow-boiling frog scenario in which we find ourselves today:

“You can ignore reality, but you can’t ignore the CONSEQUENCES of ignoring reality.”

Donald Trump has a severe case of blowhard narcissist in him. OTOH, when faced with a choice of a bloviator with a dead raccoon on his head versus the Hildebeest–which may well be our November choice, what are you going to do? Commit seppuku in the voting booth?

Patterico – people who actually support Donald Trump are Exhibit A in why democracy is a terrible way to run things

happyfeet – this is the most establishment thing anyone can ever say

He’s right, but he’s confused about the evidence. Democracy is a terrible way to run things because it inevitably degenerates to the point that a clown show mc like Trump turns out to be the “best” option. Pitiful.

“Haiku, the GOP is crushing itself. It’s a question of how long we keep it on life support”

I won’t give up hope. I’m no MD, but if there’s a chance of healing a patient who isn’t terminally ill, you do all that may be within your power to make that happen. You don’t pull the plug.

You may call it, at best, the lesser of two evils. But I think I’ve seen some truly evil things being done by a ruler and his pack of ideological jackals over the course of said ruler’s time as POTUS and I don’t think the US of A can whether another 4 to 8 years of same. Just my opinion.

“Crushing the GOP” may sound enticing – and emotionally satisfying, as well – but when I look back over these past 7 years and know how different things could’ve been if the country had elected McCain-Palin or Romney-Ryan, however flawed they were, I look back in anger. What America has on its hands today is an unmitigated disaster, on several fronts. Be careful what you ask for, you may just get it.

Colonel Haiku (aacf41)

This is insightful. There’s a deep emotional element to wanting to see these crooks in the GOP stopped. Is that satisfaction worth it? On its own, of course not. We have to be sober about this.

Romney would have been lightyears better on foreign policy. I think he would have actually been quite bad on domestic policy, with a ‘Nixon goes to China’ effect where the GOP actually cements many ‘compromises’ on entitlements and spending. But on foreign policy Romney and Mccain both would have been much better than the disaster we see in Iran, North Korea, with the pettiness that led directly to ISIS. The world will pay for this for generations. American lives will be lost. That’s too high a price to pay for the satisfaction for the pipe dream of the GOP being replaced or repaired with something that reforms our problems.

But bear in mind that the GOP loses to the Democrats because it’s not a legitimate alternative. That’s a necessary condition to the disasters we see in the world. Had the GOP put together a better choice than this dem-lite thing, where would we be today? My argument is that by enabling the GOP to persist as Trent Lott or John Boehner likes it, we’re actually enabling the democrats to keep winning, with the bitter consequences then happening.

As a boy, growing up in metropolitan L.A., I was fascinated by journalism and, especially, the three-inch-thick L.A. Times. It provided me a window into the world that was without parallel – back then there was but 23 minutes of world and national news on the TV each night, with only a little more coverage on the Sunday morning talk shows. I loved almost everything about the Times, from page one to the final page of the classified ads, but with two overlapping exceptions. The society pages along with the coverage of Hollywood, topics that often overlapped, were covered in a manner and to an extent that seemed far out of proportion, I thought, to their importance.

I was wrong, of course. I lived in a society that was in love with celebrity. Even at the time, I failed to see how politics was steeped in celebrity. Ronald Reagan was by no means the only celebrity with political aspirations. Our Senator was actor and former president of the Screen Actors’ Guild, George Murphy. And there was congresswoman Helen Gahagan Douglas, a Broadway star and wife of actor Melvyn Douglas, whose main claim to fame was her defeat by the up and coming Richard Nixon. In California, at least, celebrity and politics have gone hand in hand for at least the past 70 years.

There is nothing new or particularly different about the fawning treatment Trump is receiving. That is simply how our culture works – and especially in L.A. Why does this come as a big surprise? Hollywood, itself, has made a decades-long project of promoting just this sort of infatuation. You, of all people, should be aware of just how starstruck we are as a culture. Hollywood is your beat, isn’t it?

A native of Camden, N.J., Lieutenant Kaplan was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross for extraordinary heroism in France. At St. Croix, leading elements of his company were under heavy enemy machine-gun fire. Six men in his platoon were wounded. Kaplan dashed across an exposed area to assist his men. Using his M-1 rifle, he occupied the enemy’s abandoned position under heavy fire.

Kaplan then spotted another well-concealed enemy position. Heavy automatic weapons fire from the enemy menaced him. Braving this barrage, he continued firing his rifle at the enemy. He killed five Germans, and forced the others to flee in disorder.

Kaplan reorganized his men, led them in clearing the sector of the town assigned to them. Suddenly, however, heavy machine-gun fire from three enemy tanks swept toward the advancing platoon. Kaplan led his men forward and directed the platoon’s fire. Three Germans were killed. The tanks were forced to withdraw…

To the bottom. But then, I have confidence that’s not where Kaplan or Katz would want to lead me.

“We can’t forget, well I can’t that McCain threw that race, re the hones memo, and I can’t confirm but Romney certainly slowed to third gear at the end.so how willing is the establishment to enable the dems.”

Idle speculation. There are power brokers and puppeteers (why else would Jeb Bush burn thru money in several states while polling at 2%?), but the majority of that money is in the hands of far-left, guilt-ridden ideologues that seem to want to remake this nation into something it was never meant to be and they will fail if I and others have anything to say about it.

Succeed in nominating Ted Cruz and watch the Democrats destroy him on the natural born citizen issue. They’ll crucify him. The entire establishment media will suddenly get that old time Constitutional religion and denounce the Cuban pretender as a clear and present danger to American representative government. Democrat hacks will enthusiastically smear all GOP candidates as co-conspirators in the effort to reduce America to the status of a banana republic.

“Bob Dole likes Donald Trump. Normally, that would be the kiss of death for any around that remember how “Big Government” Bob Dole was in his day. Bob Dole appreciates selective memory and Bob Dole remembers his friends and allies and Bob Dole never forgets his enemies.”

I once day dreamed this before ,
Trump manages to win the Republican nomination, but in so doing it is apparent that he is the eRepub choice, in actuality
Hillary wins and her crimes catch up to her, or they nominate someone to her left

Cruz gets the support of all Americans who are fed up and not insane and gets elected as an I.

Well sure. What reasonable American hasn’t used harsh language against Republicans in power, particularly in the Senate? You can’t love this country and not be frustrated with the way the Republicans have broken promise after promise. The only ones who are cool with that are the ones who are corrupt.

If you want someone who is part of the establishment, or seeks to keep things going as they are, of course Cruz is not your man. Sounds like Trump is your man, actually. The people who want amnesty and debt seem to be lining up behind Trump.

Succeed in nominating Ted Cruz and watch the Democrats destroy him on the natural born citizen issue.

No doubt they will raise it a lot. The Court already ruled on the issue, so as weak as it is to say no one has standing to contest on this matter, that is the law now. But if not this scandal, then they will raise something else. Remember with Mccain they had all those above-the-fold sex scandals that were complete fiction? Remember Bush’s 1971 Microsoft Word AWOL forms? If you can’t support someone the democrats will attack, then you’re kinda just giving up. Read my lips, they will find something. Meanwhile Hillary is a bona fide felon. Meanwhile Bernie is an outright commie.

I would gladly take the Citizenship Scandal with Cruz, which I believe we know we would win, over the scandals they will just invent or already found and are sitting on for October.

Dems know they don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the election. The only hope they have is to convince the GOP to nominate a candidate they can disqualify and win by default. Cruz is their sacrificial lamb. The master plan is to elevate Cruz and then exterminate him.

And, the stupid party will be brought kicking and screaming, but willingly, to the abattoir.

I really don’t see how they are helping Cruz. They seem to be helping Trump by giving him a ton of press coverage.

We’ve had a lot of presidents who weren’t born in the states. Even more candidates who made it to the general election. I don’t think it’s that unusual, but the issue in on the tips of our tongues thanks to the controversy Obama had with his birth certificate. Remember that many believe Obama actually cultivated that controversy because there’s no downside for him, and it sucks up oxygen that could be used for meaningful criticism.

The Court is unlikely to change the result of a presidential election, especially when it would mean a 180 from the 2008.

But I actually have a better argument. So what if you’re right? Still better than a president who lionizes communist massacres. A democrat with absolutely no mandate is probably better than Trump reordering our society for our own good as he sees it.

Marco Rubio let himself be co-opted by the Senate amnesty cabal. He’s toast, he’ll never ever overcome the betrayal of Florida voters who sent him to the Senate. I’m one of them and although I voted to send him to Washington DC, I’ll never vote for him again.

Reordering our society. What would that look like? The patent office under Obama issued trademarks to a New York based corp. Delware North.

If you’re a lover of U.S. national parks in general and Yosemite National Park in particular, you’ve probably been moved to outrage over reports that a New York corporation has claimed the trademark rights to several names associated with the park.

These include the historic Ahwahnee Hotel, Curry Village, and conceivably “Yosemite National Park” itself. As a response to a pending lawsuit over the issue, the National Park Service will erase some of the disputed names as of March 1; the Ahwahnee will become the Majestic Yosemite Hotel and Curry Village will be known as Half Dome Village. The park’s name will stay the same…for now.

Her genitalia has nothing to do with anything. I am surprised to find myself defending Hillary, as she’s wrong on policy and ethics, but that insult seems to make her sex the issue. I know you just do shock jokes, but once upon a time you were very clever and interesting to read. I don’t want to be accused of psychoanalyzing you, but do you remember how Andrew Sullivan always seemed to get pretty vicious towards women in a way he didn’t towards men? Seemed weird? You do that.

Aren’t you concerned that Trump wants to be liked by the establishment, ropelight? Is he willing to be hated by DC the way Cruz is? I don’t see it. He likes attention for doing things, not for stopping things.

with the rampant utter and wholesale destruction of so many genuinely wealth-creating oil and gas jobs going on right in front of his face, the idea that we need to further dilute perfectly good gas with weird and unsavory corn fluids is really and truly both insane on its face and economically incomprehensible in the details

The problem with Trump isn’t that he’s a “cr*p businessman.” The problem is that he operates in the least free and most corrupt legal market in this country: large-scale urban development. Developers have to be expert at paying off those who hold the keys to the kingdom. Without gifts targeting powerful “stakeholders”, Trump would have had no projects to build. Daddy’s legacy wasn’t the millions Trump inherited, but, instead, a firm understanding of how to play the game. His book could have been titled: The Art of the Payoff.

Many pols, quite rightfully, see Trump as one of them. He’s made a career of greasing their palms. I can only assume that Dole and those like him believe that Trump is presenting a negotiating position, rather than a statement of principles. Does that seem like an unreasonable assumption? Not to me.

Cruz, on the other hand, is a hardliner, h*ll bent on rewriting the rules in Washington and crafty enough to pull it off, if he is elected. Do any of us disagree with that proposition? I didn’t think so – that’s why we love him. Cruz is the worst nightmare of the Doles in Washington and for very good reason: he wants to put them out of their jobs. Is so hard to see why Dole prefers Trump to Cruz?

In Dole’s biography there is a wonderful description of why he is a Republican. He returned from the war with a disability that precluded many lines of employment and decided that politics was a good match. He became a Republican because he lived in a Republican part of Kansas and wanted to be elected. He has acknowledged that if his constituency had been Democratic, he would have registered and run as a Democrat. Does this sound like a man with any fidelity to conservative principles? No. He’s a logroller from way back.

To me the problem with Trump is not that he might negotiate, but that he presents very few of the causes I think are important.

Small government.
Constitutional process.
Rule of Law.
Deregulation.
Expansion of gun rights (living in CA this is particularly important as the 2ndA is dead here)
Restoration of the armed forces
An acceptance of America’s leading role in the world.

Further, of the few things he touches on that are on this list, he shows ignorance of even the most basic details. Say what you want about Reagan’s detachment from detail, but not only did he understand the Triad, he could have written a book on the strategic importance and dangers of each leg. Trump cannot even name them. Probably still can’t, and that intellectual laziness in a president is terribly dangerous.

Yes, I’d like the border to be secure. Yes, I’d like some sorting-out of the illegal immigrants. But Trump is not the only game in town there. He’s just the one willing to toss raw meat.

We were very lucky as a country to avoid President Huey Long. We may have a choice now between that and President Trotsky. This was supposed to be a GREAT political year, and it is now just ashes.

[a] I believe that a Trump nomination would guarantee a Democratic victory, regardless of who the Democrats nominate;

Whether you’re correct or not — and polling data going back years for the very scroungy, dishonest, incompetent Hillary gives legs to your assumption — and given the major, cringe-worthy flaws of Donald Trump and the non-charismatic qualities of Ted Cruz, America made be done, it may be finished. Or, as the saying goes, stick a fork in it.

gnat is not aware that Flint, Michigan has been controlled by far-left democrats for several decades now. In this case, the mayor and city council – all democrats – chose to sever their connection to Detroit’s water supply in a cost cutting move. Obama’s EPA also failed to do its job. EPIC FAIL all around. gnat should remember that as with Hurricane Katrina, Governors aren’t accountable for this, but city politicians and the POTUS are. The democrats insisted on this.

Interesting. But I would say lets give him a chance. There is a good reason his numbers are growing in the polls. Trump didn’t like Koch, but gave him support and worked with him. The fighting with Cruz is all about eyeballing for votes in Iowa with Cruz being the biggest threat. Should Trump not fight to win? Should he be like a John McCain?

Bankruptcies happen. Especially in business. Every decision can’t be perfect and risk has to be managed. I went bankrupt. I didn’t like it. The courts screwed me over royally. Pro Se is a joke. But you pick up and move on. And it makes you wiser. This is a Red Herring to try and hang on to Trump.

Yes I do agree that Trump relates to the person making the decisions. That is his direct line. But Trump is also an honest person there. Trump is not going to negotiate for Russia or China or Iran. He will negotiate for the US.

And I agree that Trump sues and bullies. But only if his perspective is that someone is doing him wrong. He doesn’t throw the first punch. It’s a tool of the trade in the billionaire real estate market.

What will Trump do? He’ll build the wall in 3 months. He’ll knock the stuffing out of the PC crowd in one year. He’ll hire the best to do the best. That last part will determine how successful he is.

I think if Cruz cut out some government and was a roadblock to tons of regulation, my life would be better. In Texas, I feel like things are OK. Plenty of problems at the state legislature, but out of the hair of my day to day life to a reasonable degree.

Trump won’t restore your gun rights, of course. I think he would try to restore America’s global standing and our military, because that’s ‘badass’, but I wonder what that would look like. As far as deregulating, essentially saying his government will stand aside and get out of the way, I agree with you that this isn’t likely. Trump is going to say he knows better than you or your state or local government. I think his idea of constitutional process will no deviate much from Obama’s, and he will be exactly the sort of guy to cite abuse of executive orders as how things are done now. Likely he won’t let a crisis go to waste.

I don’t think Trump is stupid, actually, but like many celebrities he is an egomaniac and has cultivated a personality shtick that comes across as buffoonish. I don’t think he got where he is in the political process on accident and think he’s quite savvy about the GOP’s situation. He’s masterfully exploiting both our distrust of media and our frustrations.

This was supposed to be a GREAT political year, and it is now just ashes.

I feel the same way. Walker stepped aside early on, which I didn’t really pay attention to. Perry has always been a let down! I’m not a fan of Fiorina but she disappeared. All because Trump knows how media works and suffocated a crowded field of oxygen.

It’s important to realize that politics isn’t everything. We’re just talking to eachother here, mostly on the same page, and the ones who aren’t, like ropelight, are strong willed. No minds are being changed or anything. To the extent this becomes unenjoyable, then we should drop it. The national trend is beyond our control. Our culture is heading in a direction that can be illustrated with Obama and Trump and foam columns and giant gold entrances with Trump’s name on it. Twitter and facebook, instead of the family encyclopedia. We should brace ourselves for what is obviously coming, whether Trump prevails or not. Build a garden, stay out of debt, know how to fix your own car, and know your neighbors.

I really think before we will see political reforms, we’ll have to face some difficult times, and that those times are coming thanks to what’s happening to our currency and economy.

What will Trump do? He’ll build the wall in 3 months. He’ll knock the stuffing out of the PC crowd in one year. He’ll hire the best to do the best. That last part will determine how successful he is.

LBJ hired smart people too. So did FDR. Nixon was the smartest man to hold the Presidency in the 20th century. It means effing nothing.

A wall? Fine, but solves very little. Actually letting the BP do its job would be just as good. Kicking the PC crowd might be emotionally satisfying but solves no problems in itself. Just shows for the rubes.

Then what? Nobody effing knows. My bet is that he finds common ground with the center of power in Congress — somewhere left of Boehner’s GOP — and starts with his Fortress America protectionism, which will pretty much complete Obama’s job of ruin.

Say what you want about Reagan’s detachment from detail, but not only did he understand the Triad, he could have written a book on the strategic importance and dangers of each leg.

He could give a fulsome, well-grounded defence of US foreign policy and military deployments. The last occupant of the White House was manifestly unable to do so, and the current one is not only unwilling but may be actively hostile to that task.

He’ll build the wall in 3 months.

What wall? What if people dig under it?

This is the sort of make the trains run on time, rise-of-the-oceans-slowing rot you should have had enough of eight years ago.

mg, that’s true about water. Unfortunately that’s also a problem for me in my caliche rich yard. I can’t believe Flint, so close to the great lakes, is having problems obtaining clean water. If the government can fail that hard there, it’s not hard to believe it could become overwhelmed here in Texas if the government got stupid enough.

He’ll build the wall in 3 months.

I’m glad to hear this. How will he do so? By executive order? What about the Florida coast, California islands, and Texas’s coast? That said, I have no problem with a wall. Perfect is the enemy of the good and all. But then what? Didn’t Trump say that after the wall is built he is open to amnesty? A partisan republican should be concerned about that tremendous change to the voter rolls.

Yeah, a lot of eRethuglicans said that about Ronaldus Magnus in 1980 too. And then they spent the next 8 years lying about it and claiming they never said it. But we remember them, and we’ll remember you too.

from what I’m reading the worst case scenario is that Mr. trump gets to be president and your more doctrinaire Rs spend the whole time nitpicking stuff in an effort to help him be an even more better president

(Politico) – President Bill Clinton’s presidential library is set to make public nearly 500 pages of records pertaining to Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, according to an official notice from the National Archives.

The records will detail the Clinton White House’s interactions with Trump and his Trump Organization, as well as how Clinton aides prepared to field questions about Trump’s entry into the 2000 presidential race, where he sought the nomination of the Reform Party for a few months before dropping out.

The files could revive questions about the friendly relationship Trump had with President Clinton and Hillary Clinton before Trump launched his presidential bid last year and began taking a withering line against the Clintons.
“The Clinton Presidential records proposed for opening consist of email concerning birthday notes sent from President Clinton to Mr. Trump. Email also includes references to his campaign for President in 1999,” says the January 14 notice from the archives, which oversees the presidential records stored at the Clinton Library. “Also present is a printed database entry concerning Trump’s invitations to White House events, a photograph of President Clinton with Donald Trump at Trump Towers in New York, an autographed copy of Mr. Trump’s book The Art of the Deal, and briefing materials for press events that include media questions about Mr. Trump’s possible run for the presidency in 2000.” –

The 464 pages of records were prepared in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Another request back in 2011 for correspondence from Trump to Clinton or his aides yielded no records, according to the requester.

In the American system of presidential governance, voting is all about choosing the lesser of two evils.
That’s all.
We WISH it were like a candy store where we get to grab our favorite little sumthin’ that satisfies our sweet tooth—but that’s not how the world works. Not even in America. And not even in Texas.

The only person we’ll ever agree with 100% of the time is ourself.

In the primary, we work hard to push for our favorite savior. But once the nominations are made, and November rolls around, it becomes time for adults to make a decision. None of us lives in a perfect house, or has a perfect job, or has a perfect spouse. But what we do choose among all of our options on a daily basis is the best available option to us at the time.

Even homeless people on drugs say to themselves, “I’d rather live in a cardboard box underneath the bridge, than not live at all.”

Unfortunately, I sometimes wonder if homeless people living in cardboard boxes underneath the bridge have greater perspective than some conservatives.
The notion that sitting at home on Election Day and thereby enabling Hillary or Bernie or Slow Joe to nominate the next 3 or 4 Supreme Court justices and to conduct foreign policy against ISIS is just plain sick.

Really? You mean like Dole, who was a thorn in Dutch’s side the whole 8 years? The man who tripled my FICA tax in ways that would make Bernie Sanders swoon? He’s for Trump. So much for breaking free of the establishment — the man they really fear is Cruz.

The notion that sitting at home on Election Day and thereby enabling Hillary or Bernie or Slow Joe to nominate the next 3 or 4 Supreme Court justices and to conduct foreign policy against ISIS is just plain sick.

Do you see how this is a straw man you’re burning?

A real conservative party cannot exist with the current GOP standing in the role of fake opposition. How do we get this needed reform party without getting rid of the GOP? Maybe a third party, but definitely not by supporting the current GOP reflexively, solely on the grounds that it’s not Hillary.

I see this false choice over and over again. Either you support this pile of crap, or you’re enabling the democrat boogeyman of the day. Thus we support a pile of crap that is such a pile of crap that the democrat boogeyman is quite enabled anyway once the election is over. This is not the real set of options, and it’s actually a surefire way to keep things going as they are, with the nation headed for the fiscal cliff and democrats nominating quite a few jurists.

After long enough of this frustrating and dishonest failure, a lot of Republicans are so fed up that they find Trump to be appealing because he is not really a Republican and at worst will represent quite a change to the power structure as he really owes nothing to the GOP. I do not support Trump, but I definitely see how he harnessed the frustration of this false choice between democrat and default GOP loyalty.

That’s why I think we should be light-hearted about this mess this year. No, it doesn’t make a lot of sense in a lot of ways, but at least folks are refusing to go along with how things have been.

Trump’s supporters don’t give a tinker’s damn about anything that Trump was involved in prior to his entry into the Republican Primaries. He was a developer in New York and did what he had to do to get government approvals for his projects. That’s not on him, it’s on the corrupt city and state bureaucracy.

Trump’s a winner, he gets things done, he makes the compromises that make the whole project work. He’s what we need in the White House now. Democrats are Americans too (sort of) and they have to be included in Conservative solutions. Trump is the only candidate who has a track record of bringing opposing views to the table and walking away with an agreement both sides can support.

It is not a straw man. If Bernie gets a 7 vote majority on the Court, all young, it won’t matter what you elect for the next 20 years. It will be 1960-1980 all over again.

But the issue should not be Trump vs the Dem. It should be finding a credible alternative to Trump. What is truly STUPID is the battle between Rubio and Cruz and Christie, when they really need to gang up on Trump first.

And if Trump does get the nomination, I hope to God that there is an independent in the race whose name doesn’t rhyme with Doomberg.

Your position is understandable. You work for a government organization. You by definition are part of the problem and the reason why Trump resonates with people that are not you. Got a nice paycheck? Got a nice pension? Got nice benefits? People that are not you have none of this. So rant all you want, Trump is a danger to the privileged life you and others have. I think you need to be worrying more.

I’ve been saying the same thing since practically day one. I called this one right. But that’s like guessing which horizon the sun is going to come up over tomorrow.

Speaking of guessing, I reckon the only reason this investigation is dragging on so long is that the FBI knows a case against a Clinton has to be overwhelming. They don’t need a mountain of evidence. They need the Himalayas. And if, when, Loretta Lynch balks they go public.

A political race is a choice between the two candidates on the ballot during that particular year. It’s not a philosophical choice between abstracts.

I support Cruz. My next two choices would be Fiorina and Rubio.

Theoretically, I would like to vote for Reagan. And Coolidge. And Grover Cleveland. And Eisenhower. But they’re not on the ballot. We only can vote for whom is on the ballot—not for whom is in our heart or in our head.

Whether we like it or not, decisions will be made. Supreme Court justices will be appointed. Foreign policy will be facilitated, regardless of whether or not you or I has a perfect candidate in the game.
And just like with everything else in life, we have to choose the best available choice to us at the time.
Seriously, who hasn’t driven a second-hand car that had issues. But you weren’t choosing between a perfect car VS a flawed car.
Rather, you were choosing between driving a flawed car VS walking or taking the bus—right?

I don’t need perfect. I need a change from how corrupt the GOP has become, which is to say it is so corrupt that it will actively work against a conservative reform. The GOP is Cruz’s political opponent more than the democrats are. The democrats and Cruz would co-exist in a battle of the political process. The GOP would snuff out that chance.

I think we have to understand this problem before we can understand why Trump’s supporters seem stubborn to the arguments we find persuasive.

Normally, the problems in China would not cause the world such difficulty as the US is supposed to be the world’s economic engine. However, President SfB didn’t see it that way and thought that what the world needed was an America infested with regulators and lawyers.

I think we have to understand this problem before we can understand why Trump’s supporters seem stubborn to the arguments we find persuasive.

Something like this:

“Do you remember,” [O’Brien] went on, “writing in your diary, ‘Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four’?”

“Yes,” said Winston.

O’Brien held up his left hand, its back toward Winston, with the thumb hidden and the four fingers extended.

“How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?”

“Four.”

“And if the Party says that it is not four but five — then how many?”

“Four.”

The word ended in a gasp of pain. The needle of the dial had shot up to fifty-five. The sweat had sprung out all over Winston’s body. The air tore into his lungs and issued again in deep groans which even by clenching his teeth he could not stop. O’Brien watched him, the four fingers still extended. He drew back the lever. This time the pain was only slightly eased.

“How many fingers, Winston?”

“Four.”

The needle went up to sixty.

“How many fingers, Winston?”

“Four! Four! What else can I say? Four!”

The needle must have risen again, but he did not look at it. The heavy, stern face and the four fingers filled his vision. The fingers stood up before his eyes like pillars, enormous, blurry, and seeming to vibrate, but unmistakably four.

“How many fingers, Winston?”

“Four! Stop it, stop it! How can you go on? Four! Four!”

“How many fingers, Winston?”

“Five! Five! Five!”

“No, Winston, that is no use. You are lying. You still think there are four. How many fingers, please?”

“Four! Five! Four! Anything you like. Only stop it, stop the pain!”

Abruptly he was sitting up with O’Brien’s arm round his shoulders. He had perhaps lost consciousness for a few seconds. The bonds that had held his body down were loosened. He felt very cold, he was shaking uncontrollably, his teeth were chattering, the tears were rolling down his cheeks. For a moment he clung to O’Brien like a baby, curiously comforted by the heavy arm round his shoulders. He had the feeling that O’Brien was his protector, that the pain was something that came from outside, from some other source, and that it was O’Brien who would save him from it.

“You are a slow learner, Winston,” said O’Brien gently.

“How can I help it?” he blubbered. “How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.”

“Sometimes, Winston, sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.”

This round is such a circus I barely even bother keeping up with it. I don’t think anyone is really listening to eachother. And the establishment is so cynical as to line up with Trump just to prevent Cruz from reforming things. Ten years ago that would have shocked me, but it’s expected. It’s really apparent at this moment how serious the GOP is about preventing reform. They aren’t the party that opposes the ‘commies’ as you say. They are the stalking horse for progressive policies, expecting to remain in the minority but staying at the table of power. Not the power to change things, but the power to be important and bribed.

Excellent comment, Dustin. This is exactly how I feel right now.

I’ve been driving around observing the total lack of political lawn signs. Yes, it is early, very early, but I have seen only two “Bernie” signs. That’s it. Once the “dead” votes are subtracted, 2016 will mark an all-time low voter turnout, IMO. Which could mean that every vote not cast would have made all the difference in the swing states.

Sir, when you claim you refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils, then by definition you’re inherently supporting the greater of two evils.

On election day in November, one of the two candidates is going to become the next President. And that person will have legal authority over you, as well as the country.
This goofy notion that, “Wellll, if I don’t vote, then the President’s authority doesn’t count over me!” is simply goofy.

…According to the unidentified intelligence agency, “several dozen” classified emails on Clinton’s server included information classified “CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, and TOP SECRET/SAP.” SAP intelligence is said to represent a category beyond top secret…

I believe some of us have had differences with a recent visitor to the forum. “Beyond top secret” is a colloquialism. Obviously nothing can be beyond top secret. But most top secret is compartmentalized. Not only must you be cleared, you must be read into the program.

I live in Utah, so no matter how I vote, its 6 electorial votes will go to the Republican candidate. After voting for Romney, I promised myself that I would never ever vote again for someone who is merely the lesser of two evils. If the nominee is anyone except Cruz, I’ll vote for the Constitution Party candidate. Perhaps is the Repubs win Utah by only 10% rather than the usual 25%, they will get the message…..but I doubt it.

THAT is totally awesome.
But if you lived in a “purple” state such as Ohio, Virginia, Florida, Colorado, Wisconsin, or Iowa, you wouldn’t be intentionally throwing away your vote for the Constitutional Libertarian Pro-Life Third Party Birthday Party Frat Party candidate—right?
You’d be voting for the Republican nominee—right?

but at least if we get Mr. Trump or some other R in there we’ll have people on board whose goal is to not make stuff worse

i hear Mitt Mitt was maundering on about the cromulence of the minimum wage earlier this week

Donald Trump defended his comment during the debate that increased American wages would hurt U.S. competition in a global market on Thursday, adding that he had not even realized he had caused a stir with his remarks.

“Let me just explain. That was on minimum wage and it was how we’re going to compete with other countries,” Trump told “Fox and Friends” in a telephone interview. “They were talking about increasing the minimum wage. And whether it’s taxes or minimum wages, if they’re too high, we’re not going to be able to compete with other countries.”

It’s great to hear from you, man. If it’s any consolation, life is full of things far more interesting than politics, and as serious as the issues may be, we cannot impact them that much. I’m off today (if you can’t tell by my activity) and ran around with my dog, throwing the frisbee in the park till I was out of breath, and now I’m sipping a beer. The GOP isn’t going to spoil my day.

you claim you refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils

CS, I don’t make this claim. I’ll surely show up to vote, but will leave many of the contests blank on my ballot, as I always do these days, because I do not vote unless I know what I’m voting about and unless I believe in the candidate. What a great thing it would be if this became fashionable.

by definition you’re inherently supporting the greater of two evils

Again, I refuse to accept this is the dynamic. It’s one evil, together. DC is a mess all together. I support something outside the corruption. The idea that both sides are scared t death of team R and team D respectively is the great mechanism by which the evil has persisted despite its uselessness and dishonesty. The GOP insists I need it. Nope. You can’t really show me how I do.

yes, well mccain threw her to the wolves, re the Jones Memo, Romney hired the author of that paper, and another jackalope, Madden, to his staff, she trusted in the counterinsurgency strategy forwarded by the neocons, but she certainly expressed doubts after the last round in Afghanistan,

211. 2008 was the good old days. This time out the Fed will purchase half of new Federal debt simply to maintain its balance sheet, hanging on to 30% of the 10-year market, i.e., the basis of loan collateral the world over.

Africa, e.g. Nigeria, 200 million souls, weeks ago cannot get the the dollars it needs to transact business across borders. The enormous dollar outflows from China into the US economy will continue until China has devalued, piecemeal, 50%. Already a third of containers leaving America for foreign ports are empty.

The past seven years of malinvestment extinguish our manufacturing industries so completely they will have to be restarted by those who have yet to be born. We will have no need for those who do jobs Americans won’t, robots will be doing them even in truck farms.

“After voting for Romney, I promised myself that I would never ever vote again for someone who is merely the lesser of two evils.” – Zoltan

I felt precisely the same way, maybe worse. I felt used, dirty. I now see that it is a foolishly shortsighted strategy, so let me tell you how it changed me.

It changed the way I saw myself within our social/political world. Four years ago, I was very much taken by Newt Gingrich’s analysis of the factional bifurcation of the Republican Party, breaking it into the elite and the rest of us. I liked this formulation because it rang true and it allowed me to view myself as the victim. I no longer see the world that way.
Now I see a tri-furcated world, with both of the above-subgroups intact, but with a third group playing an important, if not determining, role. The third group, of which I am or, at least, have been a loyal member, is that of GOPe-enablers. We are the ones who claim to despise the GOPe, but then dutifully supply the elite with the support necessary to perpetuate their power. We are the fellow travellers. It’s not just the GOPe that Trump followers are in open revolt against. It is us, too.

With the rise of Trump, the Caddyshack metaphor has gained traction, but I would like to add a wrinkle to that metaphor. We GOPe-enablers may not be the bullying elitists that Judge Smails is, but we value our membership in Bushwood every bit as much as he does. The last thing we want is to see the Al Czerviks of this world join our club, let alone buy it. Despite our denials, Judge Smails is our guy and always has been. With the rise of Trump, the true allegiance of the GOPe-enablers has never been so apparent; most of our Republican pols and pundits, both inside and outside the elite, just can’t hide their visceral contempt for the déclassé Trump.

Sadly, this has left the conservative web a veritable desert of reasoned commentary (please read Don Surber’s “Pundit of the year: Dilbert creator, Scott Adams”), with some pundits even boycotting the discussion of Trump, if you can believe that.

Being one to look for silver linings, it seems clear that Trump has caused other GOPe enablers to rethink their world view, as well. This is very good news.

Every day in our lives we’re always choosing between the lesser of two evils. We’re in a traffic jam. Do we remain where we are—or do we splinter off onto a side road hoping to make some better tracks?

If you’re stranded in the desert, and you come about a little gas station that sells bottles of water for THREE bucks a bottle, you are choosing between going thirsty VS paying double for water.
But your body needs water, so you pay for it—right?
Would it be “nicer” if the bottled water were cheaper—sure, but it’s not, and you realize you still need to drink water.

Where in the utopian universe do some of you people come from?
It’s never a choice between perfection VS perfection, rather, it’s always a choice between imperfection VS imperfection.

I believe that Cruz, Fiorina, Rubio, and to a lesser degree Christie, are the best four choices to become the GOP nominee. But if none of them wins, I’ll still vote for whomever becomes the nominee because that person will be inherently preferable to Hillary or Bernie when it comes to Supreme Court justices, fighting ISIS, etc.

Everything in life is the choice between imperfection VS imperfection.

222. Cont. The world’s stock markets are off May 2015 peaks 20% and yet the high yield credit markets, having broken lock-step correlation, are crashing at the same rate 50% ahead of equities. The two will reunite at some future point in collapse.

The thinking here evinced is that our systems will survive refounding of the global economy. That is a statement of blind, child-like faith on the part of the post-literate.

“Unfortunately I do think that if there were to be a Trump administration the casualty would likely be trade,” said Eric Cantor, a former Republican House Majority Leader and now vice chairman of Moelis & Company. “That’s a very serious prospect for the world.”

As I’ve just outlined trade is dead, the Baltic Dry Index is at a record low and falling; here domestice tonnage over rail, truck and passenger pigeon is off 27%.

The children here will never know the difference, even if they could think, they will never do the work.

Understand that Trump’s plans mean that your next car will be from GM or Ford. Your next TV will be from, oh, wait, it will still be from Korea, just 20% more. He’ll kill NAFTA, so a lot of the fruit and vegetables you get in the winter will go away (and don’t expect to see them come from California, either — Governor Brown has other reasons to stop that). But that’s OK, since domestic producers will be able to jack up prices and make more money. You should be happy for them.

I think it was Bobstewartathome who recommended the book, Six Frigates, to me. I enjoyed the entire book. But I particularly enjoyed the part when one of the skippers of those first six frigates was voxsplaining his orders when he deployed to fight the quasi war against France.

…After the vessel was fitted out for sea duty, she set sail for Guadeloupe on 5 August with Captain Truxtun in command, relieving Stephen Decatur. She conducted routine patrols during the latter part of the Quasi-War and recaptured several American merchant ships; however, her overall service in this period was uneventful. She returned to the United States in March after a peace treaty with France was ratified on 3 February 1801.[17]

His victories, perhaps most notably that over L’Insurgente, made Truxtun a hero of the time. Consequently, when Truxtun arrived home he was awarded a Congressional Gold Medal on 29 March 1800, becoming the eighth recipient of that body’s “highest expression of national appreciation for distinguished achievements and contributions.”[18][19][20]

…Truxtun had a thorough understanding of the art of celestial navigation and was one among few men of his day who possessed such intimate knowledge of this navigational art. He also designed the original Navy signal manual and wrote the predecessor to the Navy Regulations in use today.[21]

I worked AirEvacs out of TSN. C-141s landed full of cargo which was quickly off-loaded and the cargo bay reconfigured to carry busted up soldiers. We worked 12 on and 12 off with 2 hour turn around times at Yokota. Top off the fuel, make any necessary repairs and get the bird airborne so the boys could get to US hospitals ASAP. It was good work and I’m proud to have been part of it.

Your position is understandable. You work for a government organization. You by definition are part of the problem and the reason why Trump resonates with people that are not you. Got a nice paycheck? Got a nice pension? Got nice benefits? People that are not you have none of this. So rant all you want, Trump is a danger to the privileged life you and others have. I think you need to be worrying more.

Well. Trump is not a danger to me, at all, in any specialized way. Trump won’t change that measurably. I do have a reasonably comfortable life. Donald Trump isn’t going to do away with local prosecutors, for goodness’s sake.

I’m worried about the people who can’t as easily insulate themselves from the unreasonable actions of government.

This means that if I’m right about Trump, you suffer more than I do. That should make me OK with just sitting back and letting people like you screw yourselves over. But for some reason I care. Go figure.

Steve, what the hell are you going on about? We’ve never clashed (unless CS is your sockpuppet). Open disagreement is the life blood of blogs, and I don’t recall you ever crossing the line. I don’t know what personal tragedy has befallen you, but remember that tomorrow in another day and that your journey ain’t over yet. Best Regards.

Trump “gets things done”,if you got the money,you can get anything done.Ever wonder how he gets things done in nyc when the unions own it?Think he greased thier palms?Like the Missouri compromise during health care debate.

Trump may not be a danger to your reasonably comfortable life, Pat. But how isn’t Clinton?

Meh. They’re both a danger. But in truth, they’re a far bigger danger to the poor than to me.

Charles Murray talked about this in a book of his I read recently: “What It Means to Be a Libertarian.” He makes a point (first made by others) that many people can “opt out” of the worst parts of government. If we don’t run a business ourselves, we don’t have to put up with the excessive regulation. When they pass welfare laws and other excessive safety net policies that destroy a work ethic and create a class of criminals, we can retreat into relatively safe communities. And so forth.

This is going to affect a lot of people worse than it affects me.

You brought it up, but got it exactly wrong. You seem to think I oppose Trump for selfish reasons. It’s not true. I’m thinking of the welfare of the country and people who don’t have my ability to opt out.

It is wonderful to see Dustin and DRJ both commenting in this thread. As usual, I agree with much of what they say.

The clear reason the Establishment is breaking for Trump is that they think he’ll fall into line. And if he wins, he will.

I disagree strongly with Dustin on one thing, though:

I do not support Trump, but I definitely see how he harnessed the frustration of this false choice between democrat and default GOP loyalty.

That’s why I think we should be light-hearted about this mess this year. No, it doesn’t make a lot of sense in a lot of ways, but at least folks are refusing to go along with how things have been.

No, this is why I am so crushed. If people were not so ignorant, and if Trump had never entered the race, we would have a unique opportunity to elect a real conservative (Cruz) because of the combination of a) the anti-Establishment sentiment people feel so strongly combined with b) a uniquely horrible candidate in Hillary Clinton.

It was a perfect storm, and then Donald Trump came in and defecated on everything.

I still think Cruz has a chance, but if Trump is the nominee, I am out.

Ted Cruz, Yale, Harvard, Council on Foreign Relations, was a Bush White House policy wonk, who pushed for John Roberts. His wife also worked in the Bush Administration for Condi Rice, then for the US Trade Representative Robert Zoellic before moving on to Goldman Sachs.

this was certainly mike murphy’s strategy, and well he’s never wrong, I didn’t say it would work,
there is certainly an economic as well as a cultural component, which Murray notes at the opening of Coming Apart.

I’ll just say it is all becoming a blur and my eyes are glazing over.
I imagine that is the goal of some.
I know there are very few, if any, voices out there that are simply trying to inform and not persuade.

The best I can do is judge what I have seen. I have seen Trump. He is about Trump, he is about saying he is great about making deals and he will make America great again,

I could do that.

Cruz made campaign promises and kept them even though it made him enemies, rather than making excuses why he couldn’t.

Right there I have enough reason to vote for Cruz.
And enough not to vote in another megalomaniac like Obama
yes, Trump’s reflexes are not to diss the US like Obama,
but in the end Trump is for Trump to a pathological degree.

Whether voting for Trump is better than Hillary or Sanders…
I hope it doesn’t come to that.

Your position is understandable. You work for a government organization. You by definition are part of the problem and the reason why Trump resonates with people that are not you. Got a nice paycheck? Got a nice pension? Got nice benefits? People that are not you have none of this. So rant all you want, Trump is a danger to the privileged life you and others have. I think you need to be worrying more.

AndyK (143186) — 1/21/2016 @ 2:24 pm

Trump is cutting compensation of prosecutors that aren’t even part of the Federal govt? How would he do that? I haven’t heard him suggest that he’d even cut FEDERAL govt. employee compensation. You have a vivid “imagination” like most of the Trumpites seem to.

Ted Cruz, Yale, Harvard, Council on Foreign Relations, was a Bush White House policy wonk, who pushed for John Roberts. His wife also worked in the Bush Administration for Condi Rice, then for the US Trade Representative Robert Zoellic before moving on to Goldman Sachs.

There’s your Manchurian Canadian Candidate.

ropelight (c69524) — 1/21/2016 @ 6:35 pm

He was in the Bush administration so therefore he’s a Manchurian Canadian Candidate. Or was that just something randomly thrown in at the end?

and somehow you missed what she said, the speech came in the aftermath of the surrender to the mullahs, a year when the administration’s slow dragging has made a mockery of the sacrifice her son, put in Diyala and Helmand, when the Veterans still lie without care, despite the potemkin figurehead of macdonald, what has our vaunted GOP senate done about moloch’s minions, or the lawless atty general, or a thousand other grievances,

the terrifyingly subtle Canadian Menace, seriously though, you think this ridicule is going to earn you supporters, when you stick to the issues, you do better,

narciso,

There’s no Donald Trump supporter who can be reasoned with.

As I have said more than once, I am laying down a marker.

Hopefully I am doing so in memorable fashion, so when I say “I told you so” people won’t be all like: did you? Instead they’ll be like: yeah, you were kind of an asshole about it, but I sure remember that you did.

It irks me to no end that such an assumption is less realistic than the assumption that horrible Hillary has a greater chance of succeeding what’s now in the Oval Office. Simply put, if a right-leaning person were guilty of all the gut-wrenching, non-purely-ideological flaws of Hillary (etc), he or she would have been toast a long time ago. Too many folks fall for the notion that if one’s heart at least is in the right place, that absolves a person of a variety of screw-ups and sins. Liberals supposedly have a lot of heart, conservatives don’t.

Moreover, I think you underestimate the power of purely visceral reactions in either helping or hurting a candidate (that was the gist of the tussle we got into a few days ago). Ted Cruz is the best candidate of them all, but he regrettably has a face and voice that won’t give him the built-in lift of 2008-Peggy-Noonan-ism. Cruz won’t trigger the “I like the crease of his pants” dynamic that helped who’s currently in the White House or that boosted Ronald Reagan in 1980. That’s damn regrettable, but it’s why I don’t think the election in November, should Cruz be the Republican nominee, is likely to swing his way.

when I say ‘canadian menace’ is as with Transcanada, whose pipeline was suddenly not regarded as legit, because it wasn’t from one of the seven sisters, who have been precluded from drilling in Alaska, in part by many of the figures that made Palin’s life a living hell, like Larry Persilly
and Kim Elton, the last running Alaskan affairs at Interior,

What’s the point of writing if you’re not going to write about what moves you? Pro- and anti-Trump bloggers have been writing manifestos piecemeal over the last eight months, me included. Few of us are under the illusion that we’re persuading anyone. You write because your conscience nudges you to do it, not because you think anyone in Iowa’s going to say “eureka.”

Yup. I’m not persuading anyone here, so I’m not going to be a sucker and think I am.

I can’t believe that Californians elected Ronald Reagan as Governor with the knowledge that he was actually born in Illinois. Didn’t Californians suspect he might be giving the Cubs some scouting reports on the Dodgers?

Donald Trump has a severe case of blowhard narcissist in him. OTOH, when faced with a choice of a bloviator with a dead raccoon on his head versus the Hildebeest–which may well be our November choice, what are you going to do? Commit seppuku in the voting booth?

Comanche Voter (1d5c8b) — 1/21/2016 @ 9:06 am

A very good point. It’s also reflected on the “Trump at ANY price” crazies. What’s to happen if/when Trump isn’t the anointed one? I guess I could vote for Sanders. At least he comes by his mental illness honestly.

I’ll be right here, patiently waiting amongst all the crickets chirping.

Patterico (86c8ed) — 1/21/2016 @ 7:59 pm

You haven’t changed my mind Pat, but you have buttressed me in what I think about both Cruz and Trump. After 8 years with a so-called Constitutional Scholar leading this country from behind, I think I will choose the guy who actually knows something about the document, thank you.

The one personality that I respect most out of the current pantheon of conservative pundits is Thomas Sowell. His words out of all the above make the succinct case that Trump isn’t just not the one, but can’t ever be the one.

You haven’t changed my mind Pat, but you have buttressed me in what I think about both Cruz and Trump. After 8 years with a so-called Constitutional Scholar leading this country from behind, I think I will choose the guy who actually knows something about the document, thank you.

Well, thanks. I think, more and more, that that is the purpose of this blog: not to change minds, as I naively thought I could do at first, but to give ammunition to people who already think correctly on the fundamental issues of liberty and limited government. After all, I know things some of you don’t know, and you guys know things I don’t. We teach each other, and that extra knowledge helps both of us.

HECK. Should I vote for a completely dishonest, unbelievably RANCID, LYING, PILE of SHIT?? Or should I recognize that RODHAM is a 100% completely dishonest WHORE and try to avoid this PIECE of SHIT???? Are we collectively as a NATION and as a PEOPLE so so so mother fecking stupid, as to vote for a betch, that has NO MORAL COMPASS, and who allowed 4 Americans to be KILLED, because she is inept and was DRUNK??
%

After all, I know things some of you don’t know, and you guys know things I don’t. We teach each other, and that extra knowledge helps both of us.

Patterico (86c8ed) — 1/21/2016 @ 8:38 pm

Cool. I can work with that.

well Sowell’s a good choice, Erickson, seriously, is McCarthy on board?

narciso (732bc0) — 1/21/2016 @ 8:42 pm

I didn’t see his name, but that doesn’t mean much. It’s a very long article and I only scanned quickly. I saw Sowell’s name, so I stopped to read. I also didn’t see VDH, but again, that doesn’t mean much. The article starts with Glenn Beck (:p), but gets better from there.

Republicans were supposed to have a very deep, talented bench.
So out trots another Bush, then Lindsey Graham, Rick Perry, Bobby Jindal, Huckabee, Pataki, some guy named Gilmore, Santorum. All beatable and or boring. At least some of them have had the good sense to self deport from the race, but not enough…
Then we have Rand Paul who also could not win, Christie who is running for VP or AG or ambassador or something, Fiorina who imploded, Kasich who is transparently half RINO, none of whom could beat Hillary.
Carson runs out and face plants on foreign policy, Rubio is OK but would need every other candidate to throw their full support behind him… fast.
Leaving us with a guy who the only thing he loves more than his country is himself and the concept of himself issuing executive orders, and a young bombthrower who is loathed by 20% of the people he needs to support him

That isn’t a deep bench, it is just a lot of players. Out of all those players only the crazy guy who is in love with himself might beat Hillary or Sanders.

That isn’t a deep bench, it is just a lot of players. Out of all those players only the crazy guy who is in love with himself might beat Hillary or Sanders.

steveg (fed1c9) — 1/21/2016 @ 8:55 pm

Which begs the question, who do you see in the White House? Better still, who do you WANT in the White House? I know it’s still early, any the primaries have yet to be held, and damned if there still isn’t a slim chance we’ll see Yeb! as the chosen one. I rather fancy the young bombthrower, but there is still the chance I’ll have to hold my nose- again- and vote Ol’ Squirreltop. Simply because Sir Hilary would be an abject disaster.

Christ on a gas powered pogo stick, I really would like to vote for someone instead against someone this time around.

from what I’m reading the worst case scenario is that Mr. trump gets to be president and your more doctrinaire Rs spend the whole time nitpicking stuff in an effort to help him be an even more better president. that sounds like a lil slice of heaven compared to what we have now

Then you need to read different things. The worst and most likely case scenario is that mr trump gets to be president and it’s a repeat of what we have now only yuuuuger. And don’t you hate it when foozle repeats on you? A fool repeating on you is even worse.

American people need to know someone will have their back on jobs, immigration, terrorism, idiots like the Iranians. Someone who can act selflessly when circumstances require. Trump can probably handle the first 4 easily enough, but can never do the last. His DNA won’t allow it and he can’t ever stop thinking; “what is in this for me”. In that way Trump is another Obama and I’ve had enough already.
But I’d vote for him even though as Patterico noted, as a Californian my vote doesn’t matter because the once great state of CA will send all its electoral votes to Hillary or Bernie.
I don’t sit out elections.
My parents brought me up to believe that casting my vote was an exercise of an almost sacred right, so I held my nose and voted for Mitt, for McCain. I stupidly voted for Carter, made up for it by voting for Reagan… California was Great then.
I remember when the Democrats offered up Gore and then followed him with the two biggest phonies ever (Kerry-Edwards) I knew my vote wouldn’t count in the Electoral College, but the popular vote matters to me even if it is only a register of my dissent.

So I will vote for Trump, or for Cruz, or for Rubio. I’d rather have Trump induced chaos than Clinton Reflux or Bernie the Commie

The notion that sitting at home on Election Day and thereby enabling Hillary or Bernie or Slow Joe to nominate the next 3 or 4 Supreme Court justices and to conduct foreign policy against ISIS is just plain sick.

But if you lived in a “purple” state such as Ohio, Virginia, Florida, Colorado, Wisconsin, or Iowa, you wouldn’t be intentionally throwing away your vote for the Constitutional Libertarian Pro-Life Third Party Birthday Party Frat Party candidate—right?
You’d be voting for the Republican nominee—right?

Even if I lived in Ohio, I would not vote for Trump. Even if I knew in advance that the rest of the state would be tied, and mine would be the deciding vote. Unless (as I fear) the D nominee is Michelle 0bama. I don’t know what I’d do then.

And that about sums it up. Hoover the fake Republican, the big government big spender big taxer who turned a downturn into a depression and gave us 20 years of direct Democrat rule and then a GOP that had become Democrat lite.

There is no such thing as a “Godwin violation”. Godwin’s law is descriptive, not prescriptive. It doesn’t even say that argumentum ad hitlerum is a fallacy. It merely observes that every heated usenet discussion ends in somebody making that argument, whether correctly or fallaciously, and that this kills the thread. The only possible way for this law to be violated would be for a thread to continue productively after an argumentum ad hitlerum had been made.

I voted for Clinton in 96 because I thought Bob Dole was boring and too Washington DC.
Plus as noted above, my personal economics got better as others did.
For some reason I never noticed VP Gore was a one note toad until he ran in 2000

…Commander Kintberger, sailed his ship into harms’ way. Although the HOEL took over 40 hits from the 18″, 16″. 14″ and 8″ inch guns of the Japanese battleships and cruisers before it sank, this heroic and gallant act helped to force the Japanese to retreat. Commander Kintberger received the Navy Cross, second only to the Medal Of Honor, and the Purple Heart for his role, and his ship was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation.

Shortly after the Battle Off Samar, he was assigned to take command of the USS ZELLARS doing picket duty at Okinawa. The ZELLARS shot down seven kamikazes before being hit and damaged. For this action he was awarded the Silver Star. He retired from the Navy in 1959 with the rank of Rear Admiral…

I’ve been dying to ask. What’s up with the Jewish thing and the letter K?

…On 27 October 1943, a short, barrel-chested, full-blooded Cherokee Indian in a Navy lieutenant commander’s uniform stepped to a podium in a Seattle shipyard. Ernest E. Evans was about to assume command of a brand new Fletcher-class destroyer—USS Johnston (DD-557)—and before him were her crew and the assembled guests for her commissioning ceremony. He told the crowd he had been serving in an old, World War I-vintage destroyer when World War II broke out. His ship had been forced to beat an ignominious retreat out of the Java Sea to escape annihilation. “This is going to be a fighting ship,” he said, motioning toward the bunting-draped destroyer, “I intend to go ‘in harm”s way,’ and anyone who doesn’t want to go along had better get off right now.” He then added in a firm, convincing voice, “I will never again retreat from an enemy force.”…

I bet there are some out there who have gathered the mistaken impression I am full of myself. I am not. What I know is, Have a lot to live up to.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said Thursday there’s nothing wrong with a little deal-making to get things done. “You know what? There’s a point at which: Let’s get to be a little establishment,” Trump told about 1,500 people at a rally at the Las Vegas South Point Resort and Casino. “We’ve got to get things done folks, OK? Believe me, don’t worry. We’re going to make such great deals.”

People like ropelight, having railed against the Establishment and chosen Trump as the only guy who can burn it down, will look at this and praise Trump. Well of COURSE you gotta make deals with the Establishment!!!

When you compromise with Satan, Satan always wins. There is nothing worthy of compromise in anything a Democrat brings to the table. It’s all compromising with Satan. That’s what’s not to like. And Patterico pegged you very well.

Trump is a husband to women and a wife to men (and also like Caesar trying to hide his baldness). He’s telling the mouth-breathers he’ll fight the DC establishment and he’s telling the DC establishment “We can work it out”.

Defining Democrats as Satan is plain wrongheaded. They’re American voters too, and they often win when Republicans get hysterical and make fools of themselves. And, yes, Patterico pegged me accurately.

Effectively, we have a 2 party system and compromise (or deal making) is how we get things done. Of Course we have to make deals with the GOPe and with the Democrats. To claim otherwise denies reason.

You know, the economy did pretty well under Bill Clinton (and a GOP Congress) and the deficit evaporated.

Just thought I would throw that stink bomb into the crowd and walk away whistling.

I’ve seen the sentiment behind that touted by people often of the left but also upheld like a hocus-pocus good-luck charm by people who are (supposedly) centrist or even of the right (or squishy right). However, nostalgia for the 1990s leaves out the peculiar nature of the dot-com boom of that time. But it also illustrates a bit of “sell my soul to the devil (or liberalism),” or a variation of “a democracy can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury.”

This is why a left-leaning candidate for the presidency automatically has the upper end, and why this nation is traveling on that proverbial road paved with good intentions.

“Trump boasts that he can make deals, among his many other boasts. But is a deal-maker what this country needs at this crucial time? Is not one of the biggest criticisms of today’s Congressional Republicans that they have made all too many deals with Democrats, betraying the principles on which they ran for office?

Bipartisan deals — so beloved by media pundits — have produced some of the great disasters in American history.”

Reading this, I imagined you stomping your feet
with steam coming out of your ears.
Knowing “your guy” is NOT going to beat Trump.
For you to write such venemous stuff
– at this time, of all times! –
all I can say is:
SCHADENFREUDE!

After 100+ years, a profound, fundamental dismantling and/or dissolution
of America’s bloated, oppressive bureaucracy is right and proper…
…so that LIBERTY may be preserved and allowed to blossom again.

As an architect, I can tell you that,
to RESTORE a beloved, old structure,
DEMOLITION is the necessary first phase.

371. …After 100+ years, a profound, fundamental dismantling and/or dissolution
of America’s bloated, oppressive bureaucracy is right and proper…
…so that LIBERTY may be preserved and allowed to blossom again.

As an architect, I can tell you that,
to RESTORE a beloved, old structure,
DEMOLITION is the necessary first phase…

Kauf Buch (c36dcb) — 1/22/2016 @ 8:26 am

I agree with your diagnosis, but your prescription is preposterous. Trump is Mr. Bureaucracy. President Eminent Domain got rich by knowing how to navigate those bureaucracies. He’s not going to dismantle them. They’re what ward off potential competitors.

I’m not going to comment on that article, I’m just going to ask. How many people does this woman have to get killed before Democrats decide she doesn’t deserve their vote?

Things are shaping up so that our choices in the fall will be a reality TV star who is all over the map and a criminal who as the facts come out reveals herself unfit for prison, but rather lethal injection.

…Emails released to TheDC in response to a FOIA lawsuit showed that in an Aug. 2011 email chain Stephen Mull, the State Department’s executive secretary at the time, wrote that Clinton had asked for a department-issued Blackberry to replace her malfunctioning personal unit. The Blackberry would be able to “mask [Clinton’s] identity,” Mull said, but cautioned that it would be “subject to FOIA requests.”

But as the email traffic shows, the idea was vetoed by Abedin, Clinton’s deputy chief of staff at the time and the vice chair of her presidential campaign.

“Doesn’t make a whole lot of sense,” Abedin wrote…

I realize this thread is about Trump. This comment is about Trump. If you think the guy who uses bureaucrats to foreclose on old ladies houses so he can put in a limo parking lot for his casino is going to dismantle those same bureaucracies, you’re insane.

The point of agreement we have is that those bureaucracies are a criminal conspiracy. What have we learned from the Hillary! email scandal? The people at the State Department spend a lot of their time brainstorming about how to break the law and evade detection. It isn’t as if there’s any question of Hillary!’s guilt. Any doubt about that was obliterated last year. But we just don’t know how the same DoJ that dropped the ball to spare the Black Panthers in a voter intimidation case, a case they had already one, will read the tea leaves. We know Lois Lerner didn’t have to be ordered by Barack Obama to go after his political enemies. She was a loyal member of her agency. Anyone who wants to shrink the size of government is her natural enemy.

I’ll stop here.

If anyone thinks Trump is going to do anything about this, you’re nuts. This is his element. He’s swum in this his whole life.

It would be one thing for the Trumpites to think he was going to dismantle the bureaucracy if he was campaigning on that idea but that’s not even a campaign theme of Trump’s. The only one in the campaign whose philosophy suggests he would do that is Cruz (actually Rand Paul as well but he’s out of it). Are these people suddenly popping up to make these claims sock puppets?

…In Dubuque, however, the feds have taken this one step further. It is forcing the city to build low-income housing for folks in Chicago, Illinois.

…How did HUD make its disregard of geography, common sense, and the right of local self-government stick?

This is literally the fundamental transformation of American. Obama has contempt for how we have even organized ourselves into 57 states (hah). He’s “fundamentally transforming us into bureaucratically determined regions, and dictating which city we owe taxes to.

He hates the middle class and the suburbs. He thinks we somehow got away with something, and it shouldn’t stand, we all need to be paying taxes to
Chicago or Detroit or whatever third world h3ll hole the Democrats have built within a thousand miles of you.

And he’s been preaching this gospel since 1995 at least. And I just read it. It was all out there. It’s not like I have any amazing insight. It was just there, hiding in plain sight. So I warned people in 2008 that Obama just wanted to become President of his enemies so he could help his friends. The Nobel Peace Prize committee had him calibrated; that’s why they gave him a cash advance on the comeuppance he was going to deliver to America.

Now, Trump. People somehow are convinced a Manhattan real estate magnate is going to dismantle the very bureaucracy that made him rich. Without them, he couldn’t foreclose on old people’s houses.

Some people just want to be so smart and special and think themselves above the emotions and idiocy of the common man. Everyone wants to be gods special snow flake. The only thing missing from this is you referring to Jesus hicks, racists, and bigots.

I’ve been dying to ask. What’s up with the Jewish thing and the letter K?

Nothing, actually. Kintberg isn’t a specifically Jewish name; it’s German, which means that in the midwest someone with that name is probably not Jewish, but in the northeast, Florida, and California they probably are. Katz is a Jewish name, it’s an abbreviation for Cohen Tzedek, so it could just as easily be spelt Catz or Cats, and some do spell it that way.

Which gets us to the real reason for the higher proportion of K names among Jews compared to Anglos — it’s really a German thing. In English most names starting with a K sound begin with C, but in German they all begin with K. Since so many Jews have German surnames, the same is true of them. For some reason, in English-speaking countries Cohen is more often spelt with a C than a K, or there’d be even more K-Jews.